USSR invades Ukraine. (6 Viewers)

[Brighton Sky Blue]

that’s even more worrying

Really? So a man chooses to invade a country from 3 sides with nearly all he’s got and there are no similarities to a certain someone doing it in ‘39?

I guess the Ukrainian journalist who asked Boris the other day was taking the piss too.

 

---

[Grendel]

Really? So a man chooses to invade a country from 3 sides with nearly all he’s got and there are no similarities to a certain someone doing it in ‘39?

I guess the Ukrainian journalist who asked Boris the other day was taking the piss too.

no there are no similarities whatsoever and for once Johnson gave a fairly direct and correct response to the question

 

[Evo1883]

Really? So a man chooses to invade a country from 3 sides with nearly all he’s got and there are no similarities to a certain someone doing it in ‘39?

I guess the Ukrainian journalist who asked Boris the other day was taking the piss too.

As stated before , we invaded Iraq without justification , what's the difference besides our views of their respective leaders at the time ?

Nobody said Blair and Bush were like Hitler

They killed over 1 million people , the only real difference is the location , Europe

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

As stated before , we invaded Iraq without justification , what's the difference besides our views of their respective leaders at the time ?

Nobody said Blair and Bush were like Hitler

The difference being Putin has openly said he doesn’t recognise Ukraine as a legitimate state.

 

[Grendel]

As stated before , we invaded Iraq without justification , what's the difference besides our views of their respective leaders at the time ?

Nobody said Blair and Bush were like Hitler

They killed over 1 million people

this is the point. Blair was seduced by a desire to go to war and saw it as a strengthening his reputation. His sickening pictures of shaking hands with troops and then condemning them to death was nauseating

The US saw it as a strategic measure. The notion of Putin rolling through Germany and France and crossing the channel is for the birds

 

[Grendel]

The difference being Putin has openly said he doesn’t recognise Ukraine as a legitimate state.

rather like Mr Adams and Mr Mcguiness then

 

[Evo1883]

The difference being Putin has openly said he doesn’t recognise Ukraine as a legitimate state.

OK there are similarities if you believe putin has invaded Ukraine so that he can then push on to the west and take it ... like Hitler did with Poland to invade Russia

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

this is the point. Blair was seduced by a desire to go to war and saw it as a strengthening his reputation. His sickening pictures of shaking hands with troops and then condemning them to death was nauseating

The US saw it as a strategic measure. The notion of Putin rolling through Germany and France and crossing the channel is for the birds

Rolling through Moldova and Geirgia

rather like Mr Adams and Mr Mcguiness then

Well if you want to go down that route…

 

[Grendel]

Rolling through Georgia and Moldova is not exactly the same as France and Germany when I last looked at a map

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

OK there are similarities if you believe putin has invaded Ukraine so that he can then push on to the west and take it ... like Hitler did with Poland to invade Russia

Or perhaps when he annexed the Sudetenland so he could dismantle Czechoslovakia later. Do I think Putin has designs on all Europe no-but he clearly would like to restore the ex Soviet states to Russian control.

 

[Grendel]

Or perhaps when he annexed the Sudetenland so he could dismantle Czechoslovakia later. Do I think Putin has designs on all Europe no-but he clearly would like to restore the ex Soviet states to Russian control.

He doesn’t and he doesn’t have the resources to do it. It’s laughable the so called left on here are calling for military conflict which will cause death and destruction beyond a scale any of us could imagine as well as economic destruction - it seems “we love a good war” applies more to the Islington pretenders than anyone else

 

[David O'Day]

You're the one accusing civilian people of appeasement so I'm asking when you're going to get involved?

Yes and I am. But it is still fucking moronic to trundle out "You going to sign up then" in reply to saying a sovereign nation shouldn't have to surrender all it's freedoms to an evil dictator. It's the 21st century version of hoping they stop at Czechoslovakia.

 

[Otis]

Very interesting on 5Live this morning. I think it was a former army general and military expert they had on, and it was a very interesting take on things.

He wasn't saying this is exactly what is going to happen, or has happened etc, but what was likely and what could be done to stop Putin.

Can't be arsed to type it all up, but bullet point wise he said....

Russia does use soldiers as cannon fodder and it's army is indeed mainly formed of conscripts. It's what they do

That they are an incompetent army, because of the above.

That the attack on Kharkiv is probably just a warning. Devastate Kharkiv as a warning that this is what will happen to Kyiv. Done as a gesture and show of strength.

That people in his inner circle will say to Putin if they disagree, but that he probably will not listen.

That the only one who could stop this war was President Xi of China. He said there is a dislike between the two countries and that they are very antagonistic towards each other, but that they have a marriage of convenience and they need each other.

This general said that if Xi phone Putin and told him to stop, he would.

He also said that Putin can take Ukraine, but he will not be able to hold it. It's a country of 44m people and it would take 1m Russian troops/police to control it and keep order. He said Putin only has 200,000 troops and therefore that is an impossibility.

It was a very interesting listen.

 

[David O'Day]

Very interesting on 5Live this morning. I think it was a former army general and military expert they had on, and it was a very interesting take on things.

He wasn't saying this is exactly what is going to happen, or has happened etc, but what was likely and what could be done to stop Putin.

Can't be arsed to type it all up, but bullet point wise he said....

Russia does use soldiers as cannon fodder and it's army is indeed mainly formed of conscripts.

That they are an incompetent army, because of the above.

That the attack on Kharkiv is probably just a warning. Devastate Kharkiv as a warning that this is what will happen to Kyiv.

That people in his inner circle will say to Putin if they disagree, but that he probably will not listen.

That the only one who could stop this war was President Xi of China. He said there is a dislike between the two countries and that they are very antagonistic towards each other, but that they have a marriage if convenience and they need each other.

This general said that if Xi phone Putin and told him to stop, he would.

He also said that Putin can take Ukraine, but he will not be able to hold it. It's a country of 44m people and it would take 1m Russian troops/police to control it and keep order. He said Putin only has 200,000 troops and therefore that is an impossibility.

It was a very interesting listen.

Don't call the Russian army incompetent or someone will rant on about "500,000" soldiers

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

He doesn’t and he doesn’t have the resources to do it. It’s laughable the so called left on here are calling for military conflict which will cause death and destruction beyond a scale any of us could imagine as well as economic destruction - it seems “we love a good war” applies more to the Islington pretenders than anyone else

I’m not on a political team. I mean we have voices here calling for Ukraine to be allowed to fall on the basis that Putin will then hand it back upon negotiation.

To me that’s just insane

 

[Philosoraptor]

this is the point. Blair was seduced by a desire to go to war

I think after the Americans came in to the Yugoslav civil war, he thought he owed it to America but found out the Bush administration was a totally different creature to the Clinton administration when it came to war.

 

[Evo1883]

Don't call the Russian army incompetent or someone will rant on about "500,000" soldiers

Very strange you are , more argumentative than a teenage girl

 

[RegTheDonk]

Was there any other way to deal with a madman in 1939 than go to war with him?

We had a treaty with Poland.

So there’s no point to maintaining a nuclear defence then? It serves no job as it’s not a deterrent? Or rather we should rebuild the empire because we’ve got nukes and therefore can do what we like?

He’s either going to use them or he’s not. You’re giving him free reign to invade anywhere he wants. What does somewhere being NATO matter he’d just nuke us then too?

If we’ve got a madman who will end the world that horse has already bolted, you’re just putting off the inevitable.

So do you think he won't use them if we call his bluff, put NATO planes in the area, and bomb his ground forces?
He's a madman allright - so give him the reason to launch his birds.

 

[Philosoraptor]

Copy and pasta from wiki


In the initial stage of the Yugoslav crisis and the breakup of Yugoslavia at the end of the Cold War the United States were strong advocates of Yugoslav integrity. At the same time, Washington believed the crisis was an issue for Europe to resolve. Failure of the European Community and subsequently the European Union to deal with the Yugoslav Wars led to significant American involvement in the region. In this process Presidency of Bill Clinton provided security guarantees and efforts for smaller and weaker former Yugoslav republics of Bosnia and Herzegovina and North Macedonia. This led to some frictions with Croatia and significant one with the Serbia and Montenegro (which US rejected to recognize as the sole successor to Socialist Yugoslavia) and Bosnian Serbs which escalated in 1995 Operation Deliberate Force and 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and lasted all up until the overthrow of Slobodan Milošević.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

We had a treaty with Poland.

So if we didn’t we’d sit and wait for him to invade somewhere we had a treaty?

 

[duffer]

He doesn’t and he doesn’t have the resources to do it. It’s laughable the so called left on here are calling for military conflict which will cause death and destruction beyond a scale any of us could imagine as well as economic destruction - it seems “we love a good war” applies more to the Islington pretenders than anyone else

That's funny, because a just a short while ago I linked to an article from someone who's made a career out of studying Putin, and she, like others, pointed out that Putin is very much driven by the idea of expanding Russia into its former territories.

But of course, what does she know. I'd much rather trust your single sentence "my opinion is fact" approach.

Maybe you can help, I linked to it again - can you let us know why she's got it all wrong?

Talking about the left/right split, it's remarkable how many on the hard right, particularly in the States, have become Putin apologists. Maybe that's because Hitler and Putin are not that dissimilar in their views.

‘Yes, He Would’: Fiona Hill on Putin and Nukes

Putin is trying to take down the entire world order, the veteran Russia watcher said in an interview. But there are ways even ordinary Americans can fight back.

www.politico.com

 

[Evo1883]

My final thought on this whole thing as I can't be arsed arguing these days....


I hope Ukraine pull it out the bag , I don't think they will , I can't see where NATO help them directly without them invading or attacking a NATO country first ..

That's me done with it , crack on

 

[duffer]

Just on the no-fly zone, an interesting opinion expressed on Radio 4 (aka Radio War) today.

Didn't catch the name, but suspect it was the Defence Minister, saying that a no fly zone wouldn't be in Ukraine's best interests at the moment anyway.

The theory is that in daytime at least, Ukraine hand held air defences are stopping Russia getting air superiority, and costing them aircraft and pilots, whilst Ukrainian drones are inflicting losses on Russian forces. (In a no fly zone, no Russian planes, but also no Ukrainian drones).

Additionally, no fly zones won't stop missiles or artillery, which is primarily what's being used against cities.

I don't know, it made some sense but then the fact that Ukraine is calling for a no fly zone perhaps gives the lie to it...

 

[skybluetony176]

We had a treaty with Poland.

We have a treaty with Ukraine.

 

[RegTheDonk]

So if we didn’t we’d sit and wait for him to invade somewhere we had a treaty?

He'd already marched into Czechoslovakia. We ignored that.

 

[duffer]

Regardless of opinions, if you want to do more than just argue about Ukraine, you can donate to the humanitarian efforts here.

Donate to Help Ukraine Emergency Appeal, organised by Anna Dezyk

Millions of people in Ukraine are facing an imminent humanitarian crisis. They are in urgen… Anna Dezyk needs your support for Help Ukraine Emergency Appeal

www.gofundme.com

(with apologies for also having a thread linking to this elsewhere)

 

[PVA]

Just on the no-fly zone, an interesting opinion expressed on Radio 4 (aka Radio War) today.

Didn't catch the name, but suspect it was the Defence Minister, saying that a no fly zone wouldn't be in Ukraine's best interests at the moment anyway.

The theory is that in daytime at least, Ukraine hand held air defences are stopping Russia getting air superiority, and costing them aircraft and pilots, whilst Ukrainian drones are inflicting losses on Russian forces. (In a no fly zone, no Russian planes, but also no Ukrainian drones).

Additionally, no fly zones won't stop missiles or artillery, which is primarily what's being used against cities.

I don't know, it made some sense but then the fact that Ukraine is calling for a no fly zone perhaps gives the lie to it...

Yes it was Ben Wallace and the reasons given are correct but the main reason for not enforcing a no fly zone is it would start WW3 in the same way as if NATO started helping Ukraine

 

[RegTheDonk]

We have a treaty with Ukraine.

Sorry, treaty perhaps the wrong word then? We guaranteed Poland's protection then.

 

[duffer]

Yes it was Ben Wallace and the reasons given are correct but the main reason for not enforcing a no fly zone is it would start WW3 in the same way as if NATO started helping Ukraine

Well we kind of are helping Ukraine, but I get the point.

My poorly formed idea, we should take the 'Russian' approach of doing everything possible to fuck up Putin, including covert sabotage of infrastructure, cyber warfare, unattributable assasinations of his supporters or him directly if possible, sink the odd super yacht, secretly fund any and all internal opposition, basically whatever we can do to fuck him and his mates up whilst keeping it vaguely deniable basically.

The cold war on steroids, gloves off, in essence, but just under the level that could trigger a war. I suspect (or at least hope) that some of this is already happening.

 

[Deleted member 9744]

Just on the no-fly zone, an interesting opinion expressed on Radio 4 (aka Radio War) today.

Didn't catch the name, but suspect it was the Defence Minister, saying that a no fly zone wouldn't be in Ukraine's best interests at the moment anyway.

The theory is that in daytime at least, Ukraine hand held air defences are stopping Russia getting air superiority, and costing them aircraft and pilots, whilst Ukrainian drones are inflicting losses on Russian forces. (In a no fly zone, no Russian planes, but also no Ukrainian drones).

Additionally, no fly zones won't stop missiles or artillery, which is primarily what's being used against cities.

I don't know, it made some sense but then the fact that Ukraine is calling for a no fly zone perhaps gives the lie to it...

If Ben Wallace is the Minister you are referring to I have to say that he does come across as very unusual, inasmuch as he seems to be a competent and intelligent Government Minister. How he can work with Liz Truss I can't fathom.

 

[PVA]

If Ben Wallace is the Minister you are referring to I have to say that he does come across as very unusual, inasmuch as he seems to be a competent and intelligent Government Minister. How he can work with Liz Truss I can't fathom.

I suppose that given he served in the army he has some background, experience and knowledge relevant to his role, rather than given any old job regardless of suitability like the rest of the cabinet (eg a foreign secretary who can't read a map or a culture Secretary who doesn't know what youtube is)

 

[skybluetony176]

Just waiting for Boris to say he got Brexit done. What a c**t.

 

[duffer]

I suppose that given he served in the army he has some background, experience and knowledge relevant to his role, rather than given any old job regardless of suitability like the rest of the cabinet (eg a foreign secretary who can't read a map or a culture Secretary who doesn't know what youtube is)

Yes, it has also struck me that Ukraine elected a comedian who turned out to be a leader, whereas we elected a comedian who turned out to be a comedian.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

News here has been that he has shut himself away in some hideout in the Urals for much of the past 12 months surrounded by a large bodyguard unit. Other unconfirmed intelligence reports are that he is turning on those closest to him and throwing his toys out the pram (that's a paraphrase) because things aren't going to plan.

Once again, the parallels with Hitler are uncanny.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Also using dramatic analogues is rather childish. We defeated Hitler partly as we sucked ionti a brutal dictator who slaughtered millions of his own oriole did we not?

We did, but much of that was actually down to Germany.

Molotov met with Hitler and concluded he could not be trusted, and so Russia did not support Germany. Hitler then effectively threw a tantrum and decided to invade Russia, thus overstretching his forces and leaving him fighting two fronts. So basically it became we had a common enemy.